Parent and Silverado school supporter Jeff Wilson received the following letter yesterday:Good Morning, Dr. Wilson:
On behalf of Dr. Dreier, the following letter is being forwarded to you:
May 7, 2009
Dr. Wilson:
With regard to your request to place an action item on the May 12th agenda regarding the closure of Silverado Elementary School, please be advised that this subject is governed by the provisions of Government Code 54954.3
“The agenda need not provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body on any item that has already been considered by a committee, composed exclusively of members of the legislative body, at a public meeting wherein all interested members of the public were afforded the opportunity to address the committee on the item, before or during the committee's consideration of the item…”
The Board of Education took formal action to close Silverado School at the March 12th meeting due to the impact of budgetary pressures on the District. After consultation with the Board President, it has been determined that your item request to reconsider the closure of Silverado Elementary School will not be placed on the May 12th agenda.
Sincerely,
Renae Dreier
Concerned parents and community members will be meeting Monday May 11 at 8 AM at Silverado Elementary School to discuss this and other matters. Please join us.
*
The super's letter appears to be illogical - she cites a particular section of code and then moves on to state that the request is denied - as if the cited code had something to do with the denial.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't follow - it's a non sequitur.
Hey what does: ... mean at the end of her quote?
ReplyDeleteCap't Greybeard
Dear Dr. Dreier:
ReplyDeleteI just read the Silverado Blog and your letter to Dr. Wilson, a Silverado school parent, regarding his request to the OUSD to reconsider the closure of Silverado School and to add it onto the May 12 agenda. I was really surprised at your tone, it is obvious to me that you don't care about this community and that you don't want to hear another word about it. Is that really doing your best job? If you have missed something or if you have made a bad decision, then logic would tell you to take another look at it. We have a lot of community members working non-stop to provide very viable alternatives and it is your responsibility, as well as the entire board, to look at these options. This, in addition to the dangers as evidenced by the accident information recently provided, is sufficient for you to have another discussion and to revisit keeping the school open.
I am so thankful my children have had the opportunity to attend Silverado School. All three of them attended Silverado School, one is a graduate of the University of California, Santa Barbara, one is a Senior at Long Beach State and the youngest is a straight A student at Las Flores Middle School in Capistrano Unified School District. They loved attending Silverado School and felt comfortable there every day, it's a shame others can't experience what that is like.
Your actions, coupled with the percentages of drop outs stated in the OC Register today, have convinced me to apply for another inter-district transfer to CUSD. Incidentally, El Modena has had 80 students drop out this year, not very promising figures for your board.
I am asking you to reconsider revisiting this very important issue.
Sincerely,
Kristine Ferguson
Modjeska Resident
We aren't alone in this fight. This is an issue that is everywhere. Rural schools throughout the US have been closing due to low attendance...etc. Even outside of the US, see this article.
ReplyDeleteOne article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7216221.stm
There is a group that has fought and won this battle. They are out of Scotland but have similar issues.
Those in charge of this fight should really contact Sandy Long Muir. http://www.smallschools.org.uk/index.htm
Thanks for fighting this fight! :-)
Another article -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29681556/
Here are a few suggestions sent me to by Sandy Muir:
ReplyDeleteIt has taken us 4 years but we have won the arguments about education,
socialisation and costs. Very few people now challenge us but many of
our arguments are location specific.......e.g.
1)Every child in Scotland is entitled to free transport to school if
they live more than 2 miles from school. This is typically around $1500
for a 5 mile trip per child per year and is roughly equivalent to a
teachers salary for a full class of kids.
2) Local government funding in Scotland is calculated on a
mathematical model which includes a calculation for small rural
schools. In effect closing them results in the district losi
ng central
government grant.
3) Scottish Government ranks attainment by rural/urban location and by
deprivation statistics. It is easy to prove using their own figures
that rural children from small schools with poor backgrounds do 30%
better than their urban counterparts. They are also more likely to gain
a university degree (25%) and are more likely to be in employment once
they leave school.
4) We have done several case studies where we have financially
analysed proposed closures in infinite detail. The figures put forward
by the Education Authorities NEVER stack up. They very rarely take into
account the associated overheads that follow pupils wherever they are
educated.
We have always stayed away from the emotional arguments and instead
have countered each of the reasons put forward for closures with hard
facts, financial analysis and educational research.
Some of these issues may have already been addressed previously, but I'd like to get his suggestions out to all involved and I don't know who is spearheading this.
Thanks!